MikkoFinell

I don't follow your logic.

Premise: We created an entity that is better than us.

Conclusion: We should let it do whatever it wants, including converting the galaxy to paperclips.

Sorry, can't see how it follows.

I'm not sure I understand your perspective on that. Ostensibly, the purpose of your defensive forces is to protect you, and don't you want them to be well equipped for that purpose? To me, your statement looks equivalent to saying that equipping the police to do their job is like an investment into the idea that putting people in prison is a splendid idea. I'm not sure that's what you were saying, although you could say that if you are hyper cynical. But even if you were, I know where you will call when someone is breaking into your house at night.

They already made the "Cheap Sucking Cash Grab..." back in 2015, and then its sequel in 2017. Next cash grab seems to be scheduled for 2019.

Why would it be a bad thing if the military had access to more tech?

I would prefer talking to an AI for business calls, because then I know I can get straight to the point without wasting time on being courteous, without having to worry about hurting someones feelings.

The military only has one goal, and that is to be as effective as possible. You can bet your house they have experimented with different modes of creating discipline.

Also the screaming happens mainly in basic training, as far as I understand.

In the context of a C systems programming class.

Yes actually. Our teacher in university described it as "Something really bad".

Your solution to oppression and exploitation is to kill everyone? To you, genocide is less immoral than oppression?

> Imagine graduating now with an undergrad in big data--that sounded like a good idea 5 years ago.

Is that a good analogy? Big data started out as a marketing buzzword, whereas AI always was an academic field of research.

You never bothered to ask the slaves what they want to happen? Instead your default reaction to a hostage crisis is just to kill everyone. Lets nuke North Korea right?

So you're willing to euthanize everyone currently alive, as well as the countless billions that will be alive in the future, all based on the hypothetical risk of someone you don't like being in power? Good grief.

Tell me, what is it you believe that hypothetical future dictator will do that is worse than killing billions?

Me too. But when programming I usually run

  clear && make all && ./a.out

  history | awk '{CMD[$2]++;count++;}END { for (a in CMD)print CMD[a] " " CMD[a]/count*100 "% " a;}' | grep -v "./" | column -c3 -s " " -t | sort -nr | nl |  head -n10
     1	167  16.7%  git
     2	130  13%    ll
     3	94   9.4%   clear
     4	90   9%     make
     5	80   8%     cd
     6	57   5.7%   e
     7	52   5.2%   cat
     8	45   4.5%   man
     9	38   3.8%   valgrind
    10	37   3.7%   rm

Where ´e´ is an alias for ´vim´.

> You throw a hardened fighter through the air and he'll hit the fence or the canvas and bounce back up.

> This is precisely what you don't want to do, Aikidoka or otherwise.

I'm sorry, but are you joking? I don't think you have even watched 5 minutes of MMA (and I'm certain you've never trained) if you actually believe that.

I had a feeling someone was gonna post this argument: that Aikido is in actually too effective to be used in MMA. It's in fact so good defensively that there is no point in even using it :^)

> Something not being used in MMA doesn't necessarily mean it's completely useless, it just means it doesn't fit MMA. The sport isn't static, instead it changes as new ideas and techniques come and go.

We agree about that. The thing is, if Aikido could deliver what it promises, namely that you are able to effortlessly throw people to the ground when they try to strike you, then you could be sure fighters would use those techniques.

I agree, most fights end up on the ground, and that is what jiujitsu is optimized for.

What's even better is that there is no longer the need to theorize about which of the martial arts work and which don't, because we already ran that experiment (UFC). Turns out that what actually works is a combination of kickboxing, wrestling, and jiujitsu. Everything else is just basically hollywood acrobatics.

There is a reason why Aikido is not used in MMA: Because it's completely ineffectual in a real fight.

Are there any studies done that looks at the relative amount of bugs in C code compared to Rust? Making the claim that Rust is better for those applications isn't convincing to me until I can see the statistics that backs it up.

Couldn't you achieve the same thing in C++ by using message passing between threads instead of shared memory? That way, you would get safe parallelisation without having to fight the borrow checker in every part of the program. I understand that having safety statically enforced at compile time is a real gain in terms of eliminating that class of bugs. However, the mental cost a Rust programmer pays for that trade (due to borrow checker) seems too high for me if you can get the same thing simply by shifting your programming patterns slightly.

Why is Rust so popular on HN? Honest question.

http://sci-hub.tw/ is reachable no problem. Cut down on the hyperbole please.

Exercise but forget math?? Why on earth not do both???

On the problematic nights, try melatonin pills. It's over-the-counter, seems side-effect free as far as I can tell, and will put you out within an hour.

On StackExchange, it's not "you" that isn't welcome, it's low quality content that is unwelcome. The humble thing to do when having been rebuked for posting low quality content is to accept the criticism and improve yourself. Expecting to be treated like a valued member of the community even though you posted some garbage is entitlement.

I'd call it humility rather than confidence.

No. Entitlement would be to expect a community not to rebuke you despite the fact that you're breaking their guidelines and posting low quality content.

They assured me it wouldn't be any problem to make calls and send messages because of that.